Department for Business, Energy and Industrial Strategy

Professions: Regulation

Baroness Hayter of Kentish Town: To ask Her Majesty's Government, further to the Written Answer byLord Grimstone of Boscobel on 15 July (HL1644), which regulators covered by theProfessional Qualifications Bill do not already have the powers to enter into recognition agreements with counterparts from other countries.

Lord Grimstone of Boscobel: The Professional Qualifications Bill will allow the relevant national authority to enable regulators to enter into regulator recognition agreements with their overseas counterparts. Such arrangements are led by regulators. The existing powers available to regulators differ depending upon the relevant underpinning legislation. Some regulators may need additional powers to enter into recognition agreements, if regulators choose to do so. This will complement existing legislation. Some examples of regulators in this position include: The Architects Registration Board;The Intellectual Property Regulation Board;The General Dental Council; and,The General Osteopathic Council This list is not exhaustive, as not all government departments and regulators have assessed whether or not they deem that they have the powers to enter into regulator recognition agreements. We would expect engagement to be carried out with the relevant regulator before any regulations were laid to provide these additional powers. The Government will continue to engage with regulators on the Professional Qualifications Bill, including on whether they may benefit from additional powers to enter into regulator recognition agreements.

Remote Working: Industrial Health and Safety

Lord Taylor of Warwick: To ask Her Majesty's Government what assessment they have madeof the impact of increased remote working on employee wellbeing; and what steps they are taking to ensure employers prevent employee burnout.

Lord Callanan: The Government is aware that the increase in remote working during the pandemic has raised issues relating to employee wellbeing. It is in the interest of both employers and employees to support wellbeing at work and prevent burnout. The Government is working with the Flexible Working Taskforce – a partnership across business groups, trade unions, charities, and government departments – to provide advice and guidance to support employers who are considering adopting more remote or semi-remote (hybrid) working practices going forwards. In the short-term, the Advisory, Conciliation and Arbitration Service (Acas) – in consultation with the Flexible Working Taskforce – has produced advice on hybrid working to help employers consider whether this could be an option for their workplace and how to fairly introduce it. The advice covers the existing legal and practical issues associated with hybrid working – and includes a section on supporting and managing staff. In the slightly longer-term, the Flexible Working Taskforce is working on developing best practice guidance for employers, which will include supporting the work-life balance of remote workers.

Research: Finance

Lord Jones: To ask Her Majesty's Government how much money theyprovided for research and development to the (1) aerospace industry, (2) steel industry, and (3) manufacturing sector overall, in (a) 2010, and (b) 2020.

Lord Callanan: The numbers below are taken from the Office for National Statistics survey of Business Enterprise R&D on what industry reported it received as public funding, by product. They do not include support through R&D tax credits; nor do they completely cover all public R&D expenditure which may be directly or indirectly related to particular products. The figures below are available for 2010, and the latest numbers are for 2019 (with the next update due later this year). The reported figures for 2010 were: Aerospace: £160mCasting of iron and steel: less than £0.5mTotal manufactured goods: approximately £943m. It is difficult to be exact with this total due to suppression of data for reasons of commercial confidentiality. The reported figures for 2019 were: Aerospace: £150mCasting of iron and steel: less than £0.5mTotal manufactured goods: £1,184m.

Department for Education

Tameside Metropolitan Borough Council: Civil Proceedings

Lord Black of Brentwood: To ask Her Majesty's Government what steps they intend to take in response to the judgment onTameside MBC v L (Unavailability of Regulated Therapeutic Placement), made in the High Court on 5 July;and whether they will publish any action plan for dealing with the matters arising from this judgment.

Baroness Berridge: Every child growing up in care should have a stable, secure environment where they feel supported and can thrive. The judgment in the case of Tameside MBC v L raises many concerns about the lack of available children’s home provision for some of the most vulnerable children in care.Local authorities have a statutory duty to make sure there is sufficient provision in their area to meet the needs of all children in their care. We understand that local authorities sometimes find themselves in positions where the most appropriate placement is difficult to access. This is why the government announced £24 million of investment at the Spending Review in November to start a programme of work to support local authorities maintain and expand provision in secure children’s homes. We are also currently developing a new capital funding programme for open residential children’s homes to aid local authorities to develop innovative approaches to reduce the number of children needing care over time, and to develop provision for children with more complex needs or children on remand.The government launched a bold, broad and independently-led review, to take a comprehensive look at what is needed to make a real difference to the needs, experiences and outcomes of the children supported by children’s social care. The Care Review, led by Josh MacAlister, has now reached its first major milestone with the publication of its Case for Change, published on 17 June. The Case for Change recognises many of the issues raised in the judgment in this case. We eagerly await the review’s final report and recommendations, which will follow further consultation, analysis and public engagement. At that stage we will consider the review’s recommendations and any cost implications.

Children: Remote Education

Lord Browne of Belmont: To ask Her Majesty's Government what assessment they have made of the number of children educated at home in each of the last two years.

Baroness Berridge: The department does not collect data on children who are home educated, however we are aware of the rising numbers of home-educated children.The department supports the right of parents to educate their children at home. Most parents do this with the intention of providing their child with the best education possible, and sometimes during challenging circumstances.However, the rising numbers of home educated children cannot be overlooked. For some parents, the child’s education is not the primary reason behind the decision to home educate, which can mean that some children are not being provided with a suitable education.The government remains committed to a form of registration system for children not in school. Further details on this will be in the government response to the Children Not in School Consultation, which we will publish in the coming months.

Batley Grammar School: Harassment

Lord Pearson of Rannoch: To ask Her Majesty's Government what assessment have they made as to when the Batley Grammar School teacher who has been receiving threats to his life will be able to return to normal (1) teaching duties, and (2) family life.

Baroness Berridge: The department has continued to work closely with Batley Multi Academy Trust, the local authority and the Police to ensure that the trust is fully supported in implementing any necessary safety measures for the individual staff member.The department does not hold specific information on individual staff members, as this is deemed personal information and is exempt from disclosure under the Freedom of Information Act 2000.

Schools: Uniforms

Baroness Lister of Burtersett: To ask Her Majesty's Government, further to the Written Answer byBaroness Berridge on 11 June (HL 660), what assessment they have made of the report School Uniform: Dressing Girls to Fail, published on 5 July; and whether they took into account the finding in that report that uniforms are more expensive for girls than boys whendrawing up the statutory guidance on the cost of school uniforms.

Baroness Berridge: The department has reviewed the findings of the report ‘School Uniform: Dressing Girls to Fail’ and is engaging with stakeholders, including the authors of the report, ahead of publishing statutory guidance under the Education (Guidance about Costs of School Uniforms) Act 2021. This statutory guidance will be limited in scope to the cost aspects of uniform. Schools have a duty under the Equality Act 2010 not to discriminate unlawfully due to the protected characteristics of sex and gender reassignment.Where a school has different dress codes for male and female pupils, they will need to carefully consider their obligations under equalities legislation not to discriminate unlawfully on the grounds of any protected characteristic.The department published guidance to help schools understand how to fulfil their duties under the Equality Act 2010, this guidance is available here: https://www.gov.uk/government/publications/equality-act-2010-advice-for-schools. The department has also published non-statutory best practice guidance on school uniform which is clear that, “In formulating its school uniform policy, a school will need to consider its obligations not to discriminate unlawfully. For example, it is not expected that the cost of girls’ uniform is significantly more expensive than boys.”. This guidance is available here: https://assets.publishing.service.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/514978/School_Uniform_Guidance.pdf.

Children in Care: Restraint Techniques

Lord Hunt of Kings Heath: To ask Her Majesty's Government, further to theWritten Answers byBaroness Berridgeon 13th July (HL1530, HL1531 and HL1532), why they do not collect data on the use of handcuffs on looked after children; whether the regulations cited apply to those transporting looked after children from one location to another; what specific steps are taken during Ofsted inspections to assess compliance with the regulations both (1) in children’s homes, and (2) in transport between locations; and whether they intend to review the policy and its practical implementation in these areas.

Baroness Berridge: Children’s Homes (England) Regulations 2015 and accompanying statutory guidance, ‘Guide to the Children’s Homes Regulations including the quality standards’, include provisions around behaviour and restraint. Responsibility for the welfare of children while transported, including from one location to another, from a secure children’s home is noted in the protection of children quality standard, Regulation 12. The registered person and local authority overall have a responsibility to ensure that children are kept safe, and their welfare promoted.All incidents of restraint when a young person is cared for by a children’s home must be recorded and made available to Ofsted during an inspection. If transportation is arranged by the local authority who has responsibility for the child, then the care of the child would fall to them. Where local authorities have contract arrangements with transport services, restraint should only be used in very limited circumstances, in accordance with government guidance on the use of restraint, and must always be necessary and proportionate.During all inspections of children’s homes, inspectors assess all incidents of restraint. Where a provider has restrained a child in a way that does not comply with the regulations, Ofsted will take action. This can include suspension of a service if they believe that children are at risk due to the inappropriate use of restraint or restrictive practices.Data is not collected by the Department for Education on the use of restraint. This is collected by Ofsted.

Schools: Coronavirus

Lord McCrea of Magherafelt and Cookstown: To ask Her Majesty's Government what steps they will take to stop fake positive COVID-19 test results being used to require school pupils to self-isolate.

Baroness Berridge: It is important that everyone using lateral flow devices (LFD) uses them in the correct way to ensure we can control and slow the spread of COVID-19. On their return to school or college from 8 March, pupils and students were tested three times at an on-site asymptomatic testing site. This gave pupils and students the opportunity to get used to swabbing in a supervised environment.In line with the latest public health advice, it is important to continue regular testing and reporting in order to detect cases of COVID-19. Around one in three people with COVID-19 experience no symptoms and rapid testing with lateral flow tests helps to identify positive cases that would otherwise be missed. Antigen LFD tests have a very high specificity, possibly as high as 99.97%, which means three false positives in every 10,000 LFDs. Despite this, due to the lower prevalence, the probability of a false positive from an LFD becomes higher. We are mitigating this by asking people to confirm a positive antigen LFD test with a polymerase chain reaction (PCR) test.From Step 4 of the roadmap, nurseries, schools and colleges will not routinely be required to undertake contact tracing for children and young people. Instead, pupils and students who test positive will be subject to the normal test and trace process, which will identify close contacts. This will be limited to close contacts. Unless they test positive, children and those who are double vaccinated will not be required to isolate from 16 August, if they are identified as a close contact, and instead will be advised to take a PCR test. Further guidance will be provided shortly. Self-isolation continues for those who have tested positive for COVID-19 and for those with symptoms.

Languages: Education

Baroness Coussins: To ask Her Majesty's Government what assessment they have made of the cost ofrestoring the Modern Foreign Languages bursary to its pre-2020/21 level of £26,000 per student.

Baroness Coussins: To ask Her Majesty's Government what assessment they have made of the cost per annum of restoring theLanguage Teacher Training Scholarships.

Baroness Berridge: The Department reviews the bursaries and scholarships offered for initial teacher training (ITT) before the start of each annual recruitment cycle. Factors such as historic recruitment, forecast economic conditions, and teacher supply need are considered. Being able to change the financial incentives offered for ITT provides flexibility in responding to the need to attract new teachers and ensures money is spent where it is needed most. The financial incentives for trainee teachers starting ITT in the academic year 2022/23 will be announced this autumn. In advance of this, the Department will consider the need and potential impact of incentives for Modern Foreign Languages (MFL) alongside the offer for all other subjects. It is not possible to say what the cost of increasing the MFL bursary or restoring the MFL scholarship would be in future, as this is dependent on the number of eligible trainee teachers that are recruited. The Department publishes ITT census data each year showing the numbers of trainee teachers recruited, from which we can estimate the cost per annum. The published 2019/20 ITT census data shows approximately 1,145 MFL trainees were eligible for either a £26,000 bursary or £28,000 scholarship[1][2][3]. [1] Includes postgraduate MFL trainees with 1st, 2:1 and 2:2 degree classes only from the following routes only: Higher Education Institution, School Centred ITT and School Direct (fee-funded). Total excludes trainees whose degree classes are unknown.[2] It is possible that some of these trainees may have been ineligible for a bursary or scholarship because they were in fact awarded a degree classification lower than a 2:2.[3] A small minority of these trainees will also have been ineligible for a bursary or scholarship because they were ineligible for student finance.

Mandarin Language: Education

Baroness Coussins: To ask Her Majesty's Government how much they contribute per annum to support the Mandarin Excellence Programme.

Baroness Coussins: To ask Her Majesty's Government what is the annual cost of supporting Modern Foreign Languages Hubs.

Baroness Berridge: The annual funding of the existing Mandarin Excellence Programme committed by the department since the launch in 2016 is set out in the table below:Financial year2016/172017/182018/192019/202020/21TotalFunding (£ million)0.931.472.631.352.979.35 The programme is led by the Institute of Education, University College London. It initially started with 14 schools and has now grown to 75 schools with over 6,300 pupils, and the increased funding over the period reflects this. The next phase of the programme and funding is due to be announced shortly and will start from September this year. The funding of the Modern Foreign Language (MFL) Pedagogy Pilot Hubs by contract period, committed by the department, is set out in the table below:Contract periodDec 2018 - Dec 2020Dec 2020 - Dec 2021Dec 2021 - Dec 2022TotalFunding (£ million)2.171.451.174.79 The MFL Pedagogy Pilot is managed by the National Centre for Excellence for Languages Pedagogy (NCELP) and was launched in December 2018. In addition to the support provided to the 45 schools in the pilot programme, NCELP has also so far developed Key Stage 3 schemes of work, lesson plans and accompanying resources for French, German and Spanish, which are available free of charge through its resource portal for all teachers. In the 4th year of the programme, NCELP will deliver free professional development courses on MFL curriculum design and pedagogy to over 1,350 teachers nationally and develop fully resourced schemes of work for Key Stage 4 that will align with the new GCSE in French, German and Spanish.

Ministry of Justice

Lugano Convention

Baroness Hamwee: To ask Her Majesty's Government what assessment the (1) Cabinet Office, and (2) Foreign, Commonwealth and Development Office, have made of the impact of the UK not becoming a party to the Lugano Convention.

Lord Wolfson of Tredegar: The Government is committed to ensuring cross-border legal disputes can be resolved smoothly, in the interests of families, consumers and businesses both in the UK and across Europe. From 1st January this year cross border disputes are managed through the domestic arrangements of the UK and EU / EFTA states as well as our international agreements under the Hague Conventions.

Lugano Convention

Baroness Hayter of Kentish Town: To ask Her Majesty's Government what steps they intend to take as a result of the European Commission's rejection of the UK's application to join the Lugano Convention.

Lord Wolfson of Tredegar: The Government is aware of the European Commission’s notification that it is not in a position to give its consent to UK accession to the Lugano Convention 2007. However, we understand that member states have not yet been given an opportunity to formally vote on that position. We are committed to ensuring cross-border legal disputes can be resolved smoothly, in the interests of families, consumers and businesses both in the UK and across Europe. We maintain that we meet the criteria for accession – it is open to countries outside the EU; all non-EU parties to Lugano support UK membership.

Ministry of Housing, Communities and Local Government

Buildings: Fire Prevention

The Lord Bishop of St Albans: To ask Her Majesty's Government what considerations they have given to replicating thePool Re insurance model to help resolve the insurance premium increases faced by leaseholders in developments with building and fire safety defects.

Lord Greenhalgh: The Government is aware that some leaseholders are facing high buildings insurance premiums as a result of fire safety issues. We are continuing to closely monitor the market and are working with the insurance industry to encourage market-led solutions.With regard to Pool Re, we would not typically recommend drawing parallels with existing Government-backed insurance schemes given the specific design of any intervention is dependent on the size, frequency and nature of the risk being insured.

Immigration: Hong Kong

Lord Goodlad: To ask Her Majesty's Government what support they are making available to immigrants from Hong Kong; and, in particular, those settling in London.

Lord Greenhalgh: On 31 January, the UK launched a new immigration route for British National (Overseas) [BN(O)] status holders and their dependents and on 8 April, the Secretary of State for Housing, Communities and Local Government announced a new UK-wide Welcome Programme to support Hong Kong BN(O) status holders with a package worth £43.1 million. Further detail on the announcement was published (attached) on GOV.UK: https://www.gov.uk/government/news/national-welcome-for-hong-kong-arrivalsAlongside this announcement, a comprehensive Welcome Guide was published on GOV.UK for Hong Kong BN(O) status holders settling in the UK, in both English and Cantonese. Further information is available (attached) at: https://www.gov.uk/guidance/welcome-a-guide-for-hong-kong-british-national-overseas-visa-holders-in-the-ukTo co-ordinate support and offer practical advice to BN(O) status holders, MHCLG is working with Strategic Migration Partnerships (SMPs) to establish a network of 12 Welcome Hubs across the UK including in London.National welcome for Hong Kong arrivals (pdf, 224.9KB)Guide for Hongkong British National (pdf, 182.8KB)

Ministry of Defence

Telecommunications Cables: Seas and Oceans

Lord West of Spithead: To ask Her Majesty's Government whether subsea cable repair ships should beclassified as warships.

Baroness Goldie: For a subsea cable repair ship to be classed as a warship, it would need to meet the definition of a warship under Article 29 of the UN Convention on the Law of the Sea.

Department for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs

Nature Conservation

Baroness Ritchie of Downpatrick: To ask Her Majesty's Government what plans they have to amend the Environment Bill to introduce a legally binding target to halt and reverse the decline of nature.

Lord Goldsmith of Richmond Park: As a core part of our commitment to leave the environment in a better state than we found it, we have amended the Environment Bill to require a new, historic legally binding target for species abundance for 2030 to be set, aiming to halt the decline of nature.Tackling the long-term decline of nature will be challenging but through this new target we are committing ourselves to that objective. A domestic 2030 species target will not only benefit our species but the actions necessary will also help to drive wider environmental improvements.Our focus is now on the detailed work to develop a fully evidenced target. We are developing the scientific and economic evidence to underpin this target. The duty to set this target is in addition to the existing requirement to set at least one long-term legally binding biodiversity target. Interventions should not be made, or targets set, in isolation. We are taking a system-based approach to the setting of targets, as far as possible, so that we consider the targets collectively and understand their interdependencies. We will continue to work with stakeholders and independent experts to ensure policy action furthers the objective of halting a decline of species.We will refine the 2030 species target following the agreement of global targets expected to be agreed at the Convention on Biological Diversity's COP15.The details of the 2030 target will be set in secondary legislation, in the same manner as the other long-term targets. We expect to publish a public consultation in early 2022 on all proposed legally binding targets. This would include a rationale for the proposed targets and a summary of the evidence used to inform targets.

Environment Protection

Baroness Ritchie of Downpatrick: To ask Her Majesty's Government what plans they have, if any, to introduce a target to reduce their environmental footprint by 75 per cent by 2030.

Lord Goldsmith of Richmond Park: There is no requirement in the Bill for a footprint target. However, this does not preclude the Government from setting one if it is judged to be the best way to deliver long-term environmental outcomes, building on progress made in delivering the 25 Year Environment Plan. The Bill framework allows for long-term targets to be set on any aspect of the natural environment, or people’s enjoyment of it. The Government is committed to setting targets through a robust, evidence-led process that seeks independent expert advice, provides a role for stakeholders and the public, as well as scrutiny from Parliament. We have commissioned the Joint Nature Conservation Committee to develop a global environmental footprint indicator to help us understand the UK’s global footprint. The first phase of this work was published in May 2021, with further development currently underway. The outcomes of this work will help inform our future thinking on the most appropriate approach to drive change in this area.

Compost: Plastics

Baroness Jones of Moulsecoomb: To ask Her Majesty's Government what assessment they have made of how their plans for post-Brexit standards for compostability and microplastics compare to (1) European Union (EN 13432), (2) Australian (AS 5810), and (3) French (NFT 51-800), standards.

Baroness Jones of Moulsecoomb: To ask Her Majesty's Government what plans they have, if any, to ensure items labelled as home compostable do not contain microplastics.

Baroness Jones of Moulsecoomb: To ask Her Majesty's Government what assessment they have made of the need for a UK (1) certification process, (2) verification process, and (3) labelling standards, for plastics labelled as home compostable, now that the UK has left the EU.

Baroness Jones of Moulsecoomb: To ask Her Majesty's Government what plans they have, if any, to introduce new standards for home compostable plastics before their 2030 deadline of the roll-out of separate household food waste collection.

Lord Goldsmith of Richmond Park: The Government's 25 Year Environment Plan sets out our ambition to eliminate all avoidable plastic waste. The Resource and Waste Strategy published in December 2018 focuses on increasing the reuse and recycling of plastics, in line with our ambition to transition to a circular economy in order to tackle plastic pollution.The Government recognises that innovation into compostable plastics could help reduce the environmental impacts of plastic pollution. However, concerns persist that plastics which are claimed to be biobased, biodegradable, or compostable, if littered or otherwise released into the environment in an uncontrolled way, may not degrade quickly or even at all, and they can only be composted if they meet relevant standards.The Government published a call for evidence in 2019 to help consider the development of product standards or certification criteria for bio-based, biodegradable, and compostable plastics as well as to better understand their effects on the environment and our current waste system. Strong concerns were raised through the responses regarding the extent to which plastics marketed as biodegradable and compostable actually biodegrade in the open environment, and whether the use of such plastics could even encourage littering if citizens consider them to be in some way environmentally-friendly. Responses also highlighted the need to better understand the environmental impacts and any health implications from using compost containing partially-composted plastics, and we welcome further research on this.The Government’s response to the call for evidence was published on 8 April 2021 which is in the enclosed document.The British Standards Institute (BSI) are appointed by Government as the national standards body (NSB) in the UK. As such they are responsible for the development of standards in the UK and the subsequent certification and verification of products.The European Union's EN 13432 standard has been adopted in the UK by the BSI as BS EN 13432. We have not made an assessment of this standard against the Australian and French standards. BS EN 13432 applies to industrial composting and there is not currently a standard for home composting. However, the BSI are running a project, BS EN 17427 Packaging: Requirements and test scheme for carrier bags suitable for treatment in well-managed home composting installations. Technical specifications and standards are an important step in ensuring that the materials we use behave as we expect and require them to. We will continue to monitor the extent to which these standards do, or do not, address the issues identified through our call for evidence, and will follow with interest any developments.We recently consulted on measures to increase the consistency in recycling for a core set of materials to be collected from households for recycling and as compostable packaging is not generally collected for recycling, we have not included it as one of the recyclable waste streams named in the legislation. To be added as a waste stream, compostable packing would need to be proven suitable for recycling, including ensuring that end markets exist for the material. Additional investment in the waste industry would be required to support the widespread introduction of biodegradable and compostable plastics and avoid issues of cross-contamination and machine damage.The evidence base is clearly still developing in relation to these new types of plastic, particularly in terms of their environmental impacts in comparison to alternatives. In accordance with the waste hierarchy, our current preference remains that most plastics are reusable or recyclable. We recognise though that in some applications and specific circumstances biodegradable/compostable plastics may be more suitable.Attachment for HL1899 - hl1902 (pdf, 471.2KB)

Public Footpaths and Rights of Way: Environment Protection

Baroness Hodgson of Abinger: To ask Her Majesty's Government what steps they take when they identify that new buildings or developments interrupt historic footpaths, bridlepaths or rights of way; and whether those steps include the creation of diversionsto ensure such paths and rights of way are not lost.

Lord Benyon: Public rights of way are a local issue and this matter is the responsibility of local highway authorities, usually the County Council. It is for the local authority to take the necessary action to resolve conflicts between building and the rights of way network, such as creating orders to extinguish, divert or create a new path. The Planning Inspectorate (PINS) administers rights of way cases on behalf of Defra, including confirming orders and dealing with cases where the decision has been challenged. If an order is confirmed, then it is for the authority to decide the appropriate action to take regarding any obstruction. PINS does not have the power to make orders itself to overcome planning issues or to direct a local authority to make one.

Home Office

Arts: Visas

The Earl of Clancarty: To ask Her Majesty's Government, further to the Written Answer by the Minister of State for Digital and Culture on 2 February (145005), with reference to the phrase "permanent short stay visa waiver for all current and future EU Member States", whether the term "permanent" was defined during the negotiations on the UK–EU Trade and Cooperation Agreement.

Baroness Williams of Trafford: The EU’s proposal on a visa waiver was set out in their draft agreement, published in March 2020. Article MOBI.4(1) contained commitments on the provision of reciprocal visa free travel for short stays:“1. The Parties shall provide for reciprocal visa-free travel for citizens of the Union and citizens of the United Kingdom when travelling to the territory of the other party for short stays of a maximum duration as defined in the Parties’ domestic legislation, which shall be at least 90 days in any 180-day period.”This text is available on the Commission website at:https://ec.europa.eu/info/publications/draft-text-agreement-new-partnership-united-kingdom_enThe commitment applies to ‘citizens of the Union’ and is not qualified by a date of expiry.

Migrant Workers: EU Nationals

Lord Taylor of Warwick: To ask Her Majesty's Government what discussions they have hadwith UK businesses regarding the need for more EU nationals to be permitted to work in the UK; and what steps they are taking as a result.

Baroness Williams of Trafford: The Home Office regularly engages with other Government Departments and stakeholders on departmental business.Employers should focus on investing in our domestic workforce and, in the first instance, raise general recruitment issues with the Department for Work and Pensions, rather than the Home Office. This is especially relevant at a time when many face the need to look for new employment as a result of the economic impact of the pandemic.Our Points Based System does not judge people based on whether they hold an EU or Non-EU passport, but based on the requirements of the system, including skills and salary thresholds, being met.Modelling by the independent Migration Advisory Committee suggests these thresholds strike a reasonable balance between controlling immigration and business access to labour.

Metropolitan Police: Misconduct

Lord Lexden: To ask Her Majesty's Government, further to the reply by Baroness Williams of Trafford on 8 July (HL Deb, col 1429),what plans they have, if any, to establish an independent investigation of alleged misconduct during Operation Midland, including that of the Independent Office for Police Conduct.

Baroness Williams of Trafford: Following the receipt of responses by the Metropolitan Police Service and Independent Office for Police Conduct (IOPC) to the Home Secretary’s letter of 16 March, the Government is considering whether further steps are necessary to address concerns raised about Operation Midland, and the subsequent IOPC investigation.

Mike Veale

Lord Lexden: To ask Her Majesty's Government, further to the reply by Baroness Williams of Trafford on 8 July (HL Deb, col 1429), when the inquiry by the Independent Office for Police Conduct into the alleged misconduct by former Chief Constable Mr Mike Veale will be concluded; and when it will publish its report.

Baroness Williams of Trafford: The Independent Office for Police Conduct’s investigation into the alleged misconduct by former Chief Constable Mike Veale was completed in February this year and their report has been shared with the Police & Crime Commissioner (PCC) for Cleveland. It is now for the PCC to take forward any actions arising – after which the investigation report will be published.

Rape: Mobile Phones

Baroness Hamwee: To ask Her Majesty's Government, further to the commitment in their reportThe end-to-end rape review report on findings and actions, published on 18 June,that no victim will be left without a phone for more than 24 hours, whether this will be achieved by (1) providing a replacement phone, or (2) extracting the required information within that period; and, if the latter, what technology will be used to do so.

Baroness Williams of Trafford: Our ambition is to ensure that victims receive their own phone back within 24 hours in the majority of cases. The provision of a replacement will be a safety net in cases where it is not possible to return a phone quickly to guarantee victims are not cut off from their support network.The technology to extract data from mobile phones varies between police forces. As part of our commitments in the end-to-end rape review, we are working with forces to provide a package of new technology to allow police to examine more devices at the scene. This means a faster, safer and more sensitive service for victims

Electric Scooters: Fixed Penalties

Baroness McIntosh of Pickering: To ask Her Majesty's Government how many fixed penaltynotices have been issued for illegal use of e-scooters in each of the last three months.

Baroness McIntosh of Pickering: To ask Her Majesty's Government how many points have beenadded to driving licences for the illegal use of e-scooters in each of the last three months.

Baroness Williams of Trafford: The Home Office collects and publishes data on the number of motoring offences in the ‘Police Powers and Procedures, England and Wales’ statistical bulletin, which is already reasonably accessible to you here: https://www.gov.uk/government/collections/police-powers-and-procedures-england-and-wales.However, information on the type of vehicle issued with a motoring offence, including a fine or penalty points is not collected.Police Powers and Procedures - March 2020  (pdf, 2461.4KB)

Department for Digital, Culture, Media and Sport

Euro 2020

Lord Bourne of Aberystwyth: To ask Her Majesty's Government what steps they are taking to recognise the success of the England football team in the 2020 European Championships, both in (1) sporting terms, and (2) presenting a positive image of the country.

Baroness Barran: The England team enjoyed a magnificent run in Euro 2020 and I once again pass on my huge congratulations to the team for their work on and off the pitch. We continue to work closely with the FA on ensuring their players get the appropriate recognition, and recognise that they are already focused on qualification for the Qatar World Cup next year.

Visas: EU Countries

Lord Bowness: To ask Her Majesty's Government, further to the Written Answer byLord Ahmad of Wimbledon on 7 July 2021 (HL1337) regarding the duration of visa-free travel in the EU, and further to the Prime Minister's statement to the House of Commons Liaison Committee on 7 July (Question 125) regarding visa-free travel for touring artists and musicians that they are working to "sort it out", (1) who is working on visa waiver or extension, (2) to which minister they report, and (3) with which member states of the EU they are negotiating.

Lord Taylor of Warwick: To ask Her Majesty's Government what steps they are taking to negotiate (1) visa-free travel, and (2) Europe-wide work permits, for musicians and crew.

Baroness Barran: This government recognises the importance of our world leading creative and cultural industries. That is why the UK took an ambitious approach during negotiations with the EU that would have ensured that touring musicians, performers and their support staff did not need work-permits to perform in the EU. Regrettably, our proposals were rejected by the EU, but our door remains open if the EU wants to reconsider its position. A bespoke visa waiver agreement with the EU would require the Trade and Cooperation Agreement (TCA) to be renegotiated. The TCA is the basis of our trading relations with the EU, and this is not going to be renegotiated. Furthermore, the Commission would be likely to argue that any EU-wide visa waiver agreement can only be part of a wider package with a binding non-discrimination clause and a reciprocal visa waiver agreement covering all current and future Member States. This was what the Commission proposed in the negotiations and would be incompatible with our manifesto commitment to retain control of our borders. Our focus is now on engaging with Member States, who are principally responsible for deciding the rules governing what work UK visitors can undertake in the EU. We have spoken to every Member State, involving British Embassies and DCMS ministers. We have established that musicians and performers do not require visas or work permits for short-term tours in at least 19 out of 27 Member States, including France and Germany. We are now working closely with individual Member States that do require visas or permits for short-term touring to encourage them to adopt a more flexible approach, in line with the UK’s own rules which allow creative professionals to tour easily here. These countries are Spain, Portugal, Greece, Croatia, Malta, Bulgaria, and Romania. We are also still confirming the details of requirements with Cyprus.

Euro 2020: Coronavirus

Lord Oates: To ask Her Majesty's Government what discussions they have had with the Football Association about the number of stewards employed to provide security at the Wembley Euro 2020 final who were self-isolating on the day, due to (1) a positive COVID-19 test, or (2) having been instructed to do so by the NHS Covid App; and what proportion of total stewards that represents.

Baroness Barran: The UK Government has worked closely with the Football Association (FA) over the course of the Euro 2020 competition. The FA, as owner of Wembley Stadium, is responsible for safety and stewarding within the stadium footprint. Stewards scheduled to work at the Wembley Euro 2020 final who tested positive for COVID-19 or who were instructed to isolatedo so by the NHS COVID app were instructed to follow isolation procedures and not attend work.At the EURO 2020 final at Wembley, the FA had 1,977 stewards rostered to work, with 1,937 stewards reporting for work at the start of their shift. This meant that there was a drop out of 40 stewards (this number being within the allocated contingency). The FA do not hold the data for how many of these missed work because they were self-isolating due to a positive COVID-19 test, or having been instructed to do so by the NHS COVID app.